ReviewTissue engineering and regenerative medicine2026
Biomimetic Constructs for Achilles Tendon Regeneration and their Translation to Human Medicine.
Review in Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Biomechanical Behavior of Selected Achilles Tendon Revision Constructs: An Exploratory Cadaveric Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAchilles tendon injuries are among the most common lower-body tendon injuries, often resulting fromoveruse and repetitive motion. Current treatments, ranging from conservative therapies to biological grafts, have drawbacks, including limited regenerative capacity and the risk of graft rejection. To overcome these challenges, tissue engineering shows growing promise for Achilles tendon regeneration, with ongoing research focused on developing biomimetic constructs that utilize various materials and biologics. Since every tendon has unique biomechanical and physiological characteristics, it is crucial to conduct individualized evaluations through detailed research and to address key considerations for clinical translation.
methodsThis review focuses explicitly on advances in Achilles tendon tissue engineering for human medicine, assessing constructs made from natural, synthetic, and composite materials with/without biologics and discussing their clinical translation. Studies were searched in the PubMed database and Google Scholar, using the most relevant keywords, such as "Achilles tissue engineering", "Achilles biomimetic constructs", "Biomaterials for Achilles tendon", and "Clinical translation".
resultsBiomimetic constructs developed from various polymers and their combinations, when integrated with stem cells, demonstrate promising potential to reconstruct tissue microenvironments in vitro and to facilitate tissue repair and biomechanical functions in vivo. Carefully developing each element, including appropriate material structures, is essential for optimizing cell responses, biomechanical properties, and tissue repair in the Achilles tendon. Although the in vitro and in vivo advances reviewed in the paper contribute to clinical research, further studies with reproducible, long-term outcomes are needed to make the constructs clinically applicable in human medicine.
conclusionAchilles tissue engineering continues to progress, driven by a deeper understanding of the injuries and the integration of regenerative tools. Furthermore, clinical considerations, such as long-term in vivo follow-up to assess biocompatibility and functional recovery, will be critical to achieving clinical outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.